CPU
GPU
Radeon R9 A375
Popular choices:
FirePro W4170M
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Radeon R9 A375 is positioned at rank 83 and the FirePro W4170M is on rank 56, so the FirePro W4170M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R9 A375
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W4170M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro W4170M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.7% higher G3D Mark score and 700% more VRAM (4 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 A375.
| Insight | Radeon R9 A375 | FirePro W4170M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+700%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the FirePro W4170M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R9 A375 and FirePro W4170M
Radeon R9 A375
The Radeon R9 A375 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2015. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1015 MHz to 925 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,024 points.
FirePro W4170M
The FirePro W4170M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 23 2015. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 825 MHz to 900 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,052 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 A375 scores 1,024 and the FirePro W4170M reaches 1,052 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 A375 is built on GCN 1.0 while the FirePro W4170M uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 640 (Radeon R9 A375) vs 384 (FirePro W4170M). Boost clocks: 925 MHz vs 900 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon R9 A375 | FirePro W4170M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,024 | 1,052+3% |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 640+67% | 384 |
| Boost Clock | 925 MHz+3% | 900 MHz |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 40+67% | 24 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R9 A375 | FirePro W4170M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon R9 A375 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the FirePro W4170M has 4 GB. The FirePro W4170M offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Radeon R9 A375 | FirePro W4170M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 4 GB+700% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12_0 (Radeon R9 A375) vs 12 (11_1) (FirePro W4170M). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon R9 A375 | FirePro W4170M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12_0 | 12 (11_1) |
| Max Displays | 0 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 A375) vs VCE 1.0 (FirePro W4170M). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs UVD 4.0.
| Feature | Radeon R9 A375 | FirePro W4170M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 2.0 | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | UVD 4.2 | UVD 4.0 |
| Codecs | — | H.264,MPEG-4,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 A375 draws 30W versus the FirePro W4170M's 150W — a 133.3% difference. The Radeon R9 A375 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R9 A375) vs 350W (FirePro W4170M). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 1mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Radeon R9 A375 | FirePro W4170M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W-80% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 1mm | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 34.1+387% | 7.0 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R9 A375 and FirePro W4170M
